While it is pretty cool, using such tool increases general lock-in to GitHub, in terms of both habits and potential use of it for automation of processes.<p>I wish there was an open standard for operations that hub allows to do and all major Git forges [1], including open source ones, such as Gogs/Gitea and GitLab, supported it. In that case having a command-line tool that, like Git itself, is not tied to a particular vendor, but allows to do what hub does, could have been indispensable.<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forge_(software)" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forge_(software)</a>
Hub is essential for anyone who works with GitHub repositories, IMO.<p>It gives you, if nothing else, an important shortcut: `hub checkout github.com/repo/pulls/1234` automatically adds a remote, fetches, and checks out the branch of a given pull request. Great for local testing/validation, when needed.
Slightly tangential: I keep seeing Linuxbrew references on various tool installation instructions. Is Linuxbrew really gaining popularity? Why would you use it instead of your distro package management?
I wrote something like this called git-admin[1] for remotely managing repositories and the like.<p>[1] <a href="https://github.com/ninetynine/git-admin" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/ninetynine/git-admin</a>
Awesome. I've needed something like this since the beginning of github.com itself. I can now, with glee and joy, chuck all the lame curl scripts I was using/maintaining to try to perform the same function, and use something better.<p>The only thing is, I don't like the name. The use of the term 'hub' is a bit dangerous - I know other tools out there named such. For me, it'd have been better to have named it something more specific/unique to the intended purpose, like 'ghub' or even better, 'github-client', and then leave the alias-to-simpler-word up to the end user.